July 8th, 2007
02:03 PM ET
9 years ago

Fitzgerald hearing possible say U.S. Senators

WASHINGTON (CNN)–Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy (D – Vermont) and ranking member Sen. Arlen Specter (R – Pennsylvania) both have concerns towards the conduct of the Libby trial prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald. On CNN’s Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer, Sen. Specter indicated he’d be comfortable bringing Fitzgerald before the Judiciary Committee: “Why were they pursuing the matter long after there was no underlying crime on the outing of the CIA agent? Why were they pursuing it after we knew who the leaker was?”

Sen. Leahy agreed, saying, “I think you may very well see Mr. Fitzgerald before the Senate Judiciary Committee.”

- CNN Associate Producer Jennifer Burch

Filed under: Uncategorized
soundoff (22 Responses)
  1. WIll - Miami, Fl

    I'm happy to hear that someone else noticed how FRIGGIN moraly bankrupt Fitzgerald is. He's no better than that dirt-bag in NC (Nifong).

    He needs to be put in prison for wasting tax-payers money and brining false charges for political reasons.

    This trial was a witch-hunt from the beginning.

    He KNEW there was no crime and continued to "investigate". Some time later, knowing who actually "leaked" Plame's name, he questioned Libby. During that questioning, Libby couldn't remember some interviews that took place two years prior. For THAT, he gets railroaded.

    I don't know Libby and never really heard about him until this trial. In addition, I am VERY upset with President Bush and do not support this administration. None-the-less, Libby should NOT have been tried or convicted of any crime. President Bush needs to grant a COMPLETE pardon ASAP!

    July 8, 2007 02:17 pm at 2:17 pm |
  2. Ashen Shard, Chambersburg, PA

    If you want to see an actual 'witch hunt' look at Ken Starr and how he hounded Clinton. Fitzgerald took his time and did not bring charges unless he was certain that he could convict. He brought charges against Libby because Libby lied under oath and obstructed Fitzgerald's investigation. Libby deserved his conviction and should be serving time. Also part of the strategy was to try and get Libby to actually tell the truth about the crimes this administration has committed in undermining our national security, which will not happen now since Bush has so conveniently let Libby off the hook.

    July 8, 2007 02:52 pm at 2:52 pm |
  3. James Atlanta, GA

    That's right Ashen, look at Ken Starr. Where is he? The only time you hear his name now is when it is being used in reference to a "witch hunt." That is exactly what Fitgerald did. He took his time, and finally found somewhere in a mountain of Libby's testimony, which was done over months of interviews under mental duress, and then prosecuted him when not enough evidence existed to prosecute him for a leak that we now know he did not commit! And, what did he supposedly perjur himself on; when and exactly how he came to know of Plame existance. He was not able to accurately tell how he found out her name and what she did for the CIA. That, until being commuted, got him 30 months in jail. Forgetting the date and time of one of a million conversations he while working in government.

    Let's be honnest. This was a witch hunt. The Senate is going to flesh that obvious fact out. Even Republican wince and snicker at hearing Starr's name. In time, those who rooted Fitzgerald on will do the same.

    July 8, 2007 04:12 pm at 4:12 pm |
  4. Ashen Shard, Chambersburg, PA

    Members of this administration seem to forget a lot when it comes to specific issues concerning actions they took or things they said that may be criminal.
    And it has not been proven that Libby or this administration is innocent of anything. Fitzgerald prosecuted him because he lied, and the jury agreed he lied. Mind you, this is a jury that was extremely sympathetic to Libby and his situation and felt he was the fall guy for this administration. Besides, if there had been no underlying crime that Libby could perjure himself on then he would never have been convicted of perjury.

    July 8, 2007 04:44 pm at 4:44 pm |
  5. Steve, Yonkers, NY

    Fitzgerald could not prosecute Armitage,the actual leaker, because he could not prove that Armitage knew Valerie Plame was covert before he leaked it. Therefore Fitzgerald went on to pursue other roads to find out who engendered the whole scheme. Why is this so hard for people to absorb?

    This Administration was very cunning in putting distance between them and Armitage. However Libby over played his hand by saying that Dick Cheney never told him about Plame and that was a proven lie!

    July 8, 2007 05:52 pm at 5:52 pm |
  6. Bill Gonzales

    It is Dick Cheney who let Scooter hang in the wind and Dick Cheney who pushed for pardon....else Scooter might have opened his mouth and implicated him. A witch hunt?? It was BUSH who asked for probe and BUSH who said whoever leaked should be punished and BUSH who also said he respected the jury's decision. They are all a bunch of hypocrites and as soon as he's gone, our long national nightmare will be over.

    July 8, 2007 06:46 pm at 6:46 pm |
  7. John Leal Azusa California

    It is high time we get to the bottom of this fiasco and stop beating around the Bush. For right wing bloggers and pundits to be comparing the Clinton's pardons to the Scooter Libby commutation is preposterous. President Clinton lied under oath trying to cover up a consensual sexual favor from the not so innocent Monica and also trying to keep a private personal matter (Private!!)
    Scooter lied under oath to keep the prosecutor and the American people from finding out the falsehoods that led to American invading a sovereign country and the horrible dilemma our beloved troops are facing in Iraq every day. We fermented an insurgency helped destabilize an entire region where before the warring parties held each other in check.
    And don't even get me started on the millions of dollars lost to corruption, mismanagement etc. Our prestige and honor around the world has taken a huge hit. I do not think you can hardly compare the two and our Congress should move forward immediately holding hearing on high crimes and misdemeanors.

    July 8, 2007 07:36 pm at 7:36 pm |
  8. Jeff Spangler, Arlington, VA

    Great idea. Much of the sordid truth of Cheney's direction and coverup of the Plane outing will meerg ein the Wilsons' civil case, but to the extent Fitz can presently disclose his reasons, it will help us understand why this case was brought by a no-BS prosecutor against the VP's lawyer.

    July 8, 2007 08:38 pm at 8:38 pm |
  9. Ann Brunswick ME

    Hearings, hearings. Is that what you are in DC for? Please, do us all a favor, stop the nonsense and do your job.

    July 8, 2007 10:39 pm at 10:39 pm |
  10. Kristy Sanborn, Dixon, Mo.

    Why was it being pursued after they already knew who the leaker was, according to Sen. Spector, anyway? Why isn't the guilty one charged yet then? If they don't have enough evidence to get the guilty one that did the leak, then a person would wonder why Patrick FITZGERALD, went after Mr. Libby to start with.
    I hope that at least Patrick Fitzgerald has to pay back all the money he cost Mr. Libby for doing this to him.
    Whether Mr. Libby lied or not under oath, the investigators know and the Jury decided. But, I know I wouldn't want Mr. Patrick Fitzgerald representing me, but he probably already knows that.
    I'd probably call him 'John' or some other name if I caught him in a lie, I don't think Mr. Patrick Fitzgerald is above doing that.
    Personally, I would have to wonder how honest was the investigation Mr. Patrick Fitzgerald conducted in Mr.Libby's case to start with. If he goes before the Senate Judiciary Committee, then maybe we will get to hear Mr. Patrick's side of the story.

    July 8, 2007 11:00 pm at 11:00 pm |
  11. Tricia M Charlottetown PEI Canada

    Bill Gonzales:

    I agree Bush needs to go before the Nightmare is over but that will only happen if American doesn't vote another Bush Clone into office..And there are a more than a few running.

    July 8, 2007 11:25 pm at 11:25 pm |
  12. Paul Johnston, Professor of Political Studies, UCLA


    July 8, 2007 11:54 pm at 11:54 pm |
  13. Robert, Edmond, OK.

    Man, how we forget the pardons that clinton granted hours before he left office. And, the "nightmare" will only BEGIN if hilary or obama is elected.

    July 8, 2007 11:55 pm at 11:55 pm |
  14. Mike, Corpus Christi Texas

    This has to be the irony of ironies. Patrick Fitzgerald was a 'bush appointee.' Fitzgerald is also a Republican. He always had the reputation of a devout conservative prosecutor. If he is called to show up for a senate hearing, things are going to get "very interesting!"

    July 9, 2007 04:51 am at 4:51 am |
  15. Ali Akbar

    Oh HELL yeah!

    Finally a pursuit of Justice.

    July 9, 2007 05:49 am at 5:49 am |
  16. Shawnie - Grants Pass, OR

    If Bush is impeached, Cheney is his replacement. Will that make you happy? It isn't worthwhile.

    July 9, 2007 08:11 am at 8:11 am |
  17. Larry, CT

    Libby was leaking Plame's name all over the place well before Armitage purportedly "leaked" anything. Armitage was made the fall guy, took one for the team so to speak. Libby should be locked up.

    July 9, 2007 08:14 am at 8:14 am |
  18. Larry, CT


    Here's the real story.

    July 9, 2007 08:16 am at 8:16 am |
  19. Terence W. McCormick, New York, N.Y.

    Nonsense. Fitzgerald was the only honorable participant in this fiasco. With witnesses lying before a grand jury, and the WH getting away with a polically motivated violation of the Espionage Act, Mr. Fitzgerald served honorably and well. Leahy should stop his usual posturing and issue a subpoena to someone else, like Karl Rove, Robert Novak and the manager of the WH e-mail system.

    July 9, 2007 08:21 am at 8:21 am |
  20. Pixie, Murfreesboro, TN

    Yeah this is a weird turn. Fitzgerald is the most straight-laced apolitical figure in this whole mess. To me it seems that getting to the TRUTH was what drove him. If Libby was going to lie on the witness stand to protect the white house, why should that not be prosecuted? Am I missing something here??

    Wasn't it the lying on the stand that made Republicans go after Clinton??? Or was it the unlying crime of a BJ?


    July 9, 2007 08:55 am at 8:55 am |
  21. Rex, Toledo, Ohio

    Scary stuff. By reading through the blog comments here at CNN, it's quite obvious to me that we Americans are still divided. So sad. When in Gods name are the faith-based neocons going to wake up and smell the proverbial coffee? Bush/Cheney are corrupt. We all know that. I laugh when the right constantly brings up,"but, Clinton did it". Who gives a rats hind end what Clinton did. That's history. Let's worry about the Bush administration and your freedoms being dissolved while you whine about the left.
    Libby was obviously a skapegoat. I assure you the convo went something like this,:
    Fitz to Scooter:
    I'm sorry old buddy, but the "boss" wants you to take the fall so Dick can breath a little easier, and the American people can see that justice is being served. Don't worry, the jury will find you guilty, but the "boss" will negate that asap.
    Bush to Scooter: Thanks again buddy for taking the heat. God bless America.
    Wow, I just thought of Olie North. Another scapegoat that got railroaded.

    July 9, 2007 10:04 am at 10:04 am |
  22. Anonymous

    It is okay to have a 30 million dollar investigation and trial on whether Bill Clinton had consensual sex, what type of sex and the exact details of that sex...

    But not okay to investigate why Libby was committed obstruction of justice, who he was protecting by not cooperating, repeatedly lying and the implication of the motive for the crimes. Political revenge, somebody leaked that info...again only a select few had access to that personal info.

    Disturbing how all the Republicans wanted to lynch Clinton for having sex and lying about sex...yet don't feel the same standard has to apply to the Libby case. DON'T GIVE ME EXCUSES HYPOCRITES.

    July 9, 2007 03:23 pm at 3:23 pm |